Jennaye

Thanks guys, for the good discussion and realization (for most of you) that this post wasn't supposed to be a debate on AA. Amarain hit the nail on the head.

Based on pure numbers, I would have a 15% chance or so of getting accepted to UC-Berkeley or UCLA (my top choices). but the numbers don't tell everything, and I'm wondering if my chances are better or worse than 15%, i.e. were the people who were admitted with my numbers mostly URMs (which I'm not) or were they applicants with great LORs, extracurriculars, political activism, etc., which would give me hope.

Logged

Jennaye

At that point, I'm not sure what else you can do. Stellar LORs? Persistnet communication with adcomms? Amazing PS? If you are concerned about not "standing out" with your scores, you've got to start early to improve other things, like adding community involvement, travel or off the wall crazy weird/good thing to write your PS about.

To go off on a tangent... what's this about persistent communication with adcomms? In all the correspondence I've recieved from schools, they make it sound like I'll be shot on site if I contact the admissions office for a non-urgent matter. What could I do to call? I'm really trying to get into Berkeley, because I applied to their joint JD/PhD in Jurisprudence and Social Policy program (which I'm pretty sure I'll get into, got LORs from profs with personal friends over there), and think it'd be perfect for me. Do people call just to chat with adcomms?

I have an idea. Rather than complaining that your low score is more disfavorable than another person's low score, why not just get a higher score?

It's a test of your reading speed of comprehension and logical acuity. Both of these things are learnable and in your control. Unlike your and the rest of the applicant pool's genetics or upbringing--and once you're out of school your GPA and those ECs are basically in cement, too.

I just don't have a lot of sympathy for people who blame other applicants' backgrounds for weaknesses in their own applications. You should be focused on becoming the best applicant you can be in all respects and forget about the things you can't influence.

Just because you're from an avergage, white background doesn't mean you will be bypassed in favor of "URM's with lesser scores". It just means that in that particular case you couldn't match a bilingual, bicultural individual who has tons more cultural capital - and who knows how to write about it - than you'll ever dream of having.

WoeIsMe

yea, i agree... consideration of race as part of SES is a point most people would be fine with. 'Race-based admission' regardless of background is what people object to. The former is objective, the latter is ridiculous.

Just because you're from an avergage, white background doesn't mean you will be bypassed in favor of "URM's with lesser scores". It just means that in that particular case you couldn't match a bilingual, bicultural individual who has tons more cultural capital - and who knows how to write about it - than you'll ever dream of having.

Especially if you, as a white Anglo, are straight out of undergrad.

You don't have to write about being an URM to get that advantage, although it certainly helps. You also don't have to be bilingual or bicultural (?) to be an URM. And no one said anything about being passed up for an URM. Get off your defensiveness. All that was said was that it is easier for a URM with lower scores than a non-URM with lower scores. Not that all URMs with lower scores get in, not that no non-URM with lower scores don't. Calm down.

What exactly is "cultural capital" anyway?

At any rate, I think there have been some good suggestions here. It seems that you have to just make yourself 'diverse' if you didn't happen to be born that way. So, take an unusual job after undergrad, do lots of ECs, find something unique to write your PS about (much easier said than done!).

A.J

Just because you're from an avergage, white background doesn't mean you will be bypassed in favor of "URM's with lesser scores". It just means that in that particular case you couldn't match a bilingual, bicultural individual who has tons more cultural capital - and who knows how to write about it - than you'll ever dream of having.